Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Mar 2006 16:34 UTC, submitted by Linuxfanboy
Microsoft "This time it's patents that will ensure the downfall of GNU/Linux and with it, the entire world of open source. But before hanging up your certified geek propeller-hat and retraining as a dental hygienist, you might want to consider the following brief history of Microsoft's use of fear, uncertainty, and doubt as a weapon against GNU/Linux." Hopelessly pro-everything-that-is-Linux, but an interesting overview of Microsoft's approach to Linux over the years nonetheless. Elsewhere, the Guardian looks at the challanges Microsoft is currently facing.
Order by: Score:
Must read!
by ZaNkY on Thu 30th Mar 2006 17:26 UTC
ZaNkY
Member since:
2005-10-18

This is a must read! Good article, and I've only read half of it so far lol.

Going back to reading ;)

--ZaNkY

Reply Score: 5

RE: Must read!
by JamesTRexx on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:42 UTC in reply to "Must read!"
JamesTRexx Member since:
2005-11-06

Indeed a must read, along with the linked articles in it.

Over the years it has become obvious that MS is getting more and more nervous about OSS. Just like they push collaboration with their Office software OSS is pushing collaboration between developers and users around the world. OSS is like one massive, worldwide project and even if MS tried, it's too big to stop it.

I think the lies, backstabbing, etc. over the years is backfiring now, and the only way MS can save its face is to come clean and become a honest company. Swallow the false pride, admit that they're not the be-all, end-all and work together with other companies to improve the world of IT. This way they would always have a market for OS, Office, games, etc. because going against everything and everyone might just mean they won't have anything left in the end. (yes, that could be tommorrow, or in many, many years)
MS doesn't make bad software, it's just too closed and arrogant, and that won't make them any friends.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Must read!
by Angel--Fr@gzill@ on Thu 30th Mar 2006 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Must read!"
Angel--Fr@gzill@ Member since:
2005-12-23

!!!

"MS doesn't make bad software, it's just too closed and arrogant, and that won't make them any friends"

---

Ms does NOT make bad software ???

- Well, from a technical point of view:

They have done bad software, they have done good software too, and they have done HORRIBLE software, plenty of bugs, bugy patches and premature releases for the sake of greed, sistematically (OSs only getting stabillity over the years)...

- but, from a moral point of view (if you want to apply this to software. You can apply ethics to everything in life actualy):

All their software is extremely HORRIBLE...

Too closed and arrogant, sure they are...
and, that won't make them any friends, YES, but between people with some concern of ethics in software, law, economics...
Anyway, they have all the friends that money and power can buy... do not underestimate Ms.

!!!

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Must read!
by JamesTRexx on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Must read!"
JamesTRexx Member since:
2005-11-06

Morally, it's horrible indeed. *nods* But, and I hate to admit it, :-P, there are aspects of their suites which are very good. At work it's all MS, at home I run FreeBSD and recently also Gentoo, and all of the different OS' have their ups and downs.

That's why I hope MS learns to share and play nice, it would be a shame to never be able to build upon their work and make every platform better and the way users want to use it.

And, friends you gain with money aren't real friends, eventually they'll find out.

Reply Score: 2

Microsoft meet OIN
by Moulinneuf on Thu 30th Mar 2006 17:33 UTC
Moulinneuf
Member since:
2005-07-06

Microsoft meet OIN :

http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/

There is even talk of open patent system to offer legal patent financing to protect innovation that is not yet patented.

Reply Score: 5

Excellent article
by archiesteel on Thu 30th Mar 2006 17:42 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

I wouldn't say it's "pro-everything-that-is-Linux", however, that seems a bit over-the-top...The guy is clearly pro-Linux, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he's right.

I say to MS: bring out the patent suits against Linux. This will spark a patent war with Novell and IBM, and maybe this will finally lead to the invalidation of software patents as a whole and a welcome revision of the outdated patent system.

However, I agree with the article's author: this is classic FUD, a last-ditch attempt against Linux by MS, and nothing will come out of it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Excellent article
by Tyr. on Thu 30th Mar 2006 18:00 UTC in reply to "Excellent article"
Tyr. Member since:
2005-07-06

I say to MS: bring out the patent suits against Linux. This will spark a patent war with Novell and IBM, and maybe this will finally lead to the invalidation of software patents as a whole and a welcome revision of the outdated patent system.

Patents are the nuclear bombs of the IT industry. Noone is going to do an all-out first strike because everybody will get burned and while it may not be "mutual destruction", nobody wants to see what the world would look like afterwards. (This does not preclude the dropping of a few dirty bombs by either side in skirmishes here and there though)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Excellent article
by ma_d on Thu 30th Mar 2006 21:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Excellent article"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

It would be mutual disarming. They'd basically have to all sit down and say, "ok, these patents don't work cause we all infringe against everyone!" The suits would fail, the lawyers would win a little extra money, and software patents would be showed for the joke they are.

So please, someone start it. Sue Microsoft. At worst software patents would be the joke of the century, and at least you'd be end up two companies.

Oh yes, and, "Developers, developers, developers!"

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Excellent article
by gustl on Fri 31st Mar 2006 11:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Excellent article"
gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

I agree.

If you need 10 lawyers next to every programmer and still are not able to create a product which does not infringe on anything, the IT industry will go down in flames.

MS will continue the patent FUD indefinitely, but they will not sue a major open source project directly.

However they might try patent lawsuits via proxy.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Excellent article
by kaiwai on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:07 UTC in reply to "Excellent article"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I say to MS: bring out the patent suits against Linux. This will spark a patent war with Novell and IBM, and maybe this will finally lead to the invalidation of software patents as a whole and a welcome revision of the outdated patent system.

Also, many of these supposed patents are what I would called 'filing cabnet fillers' and 'stockholder boosters' - the ability to say, "yeah! we spend $6billion in R&D, and we have 3000 patents".

What they don't say are the number of those patents which are for rubbish like "double click" or "picture that represents a link to an application"; trying to patent commodity technology.

When all is said and done, if they do try and use their patents, as long as the defence has a good team of lawyers with technical know how, it'll be simply a matter of actually getting Microsoft to justify patents on concepts developed before the existance of their company.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Excellent article
by hal2k1 on Fri 31st Mar 2006 13:10 UTC in reply to "Excellent article"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//I wouldn't say it's "pro-everything-that-is-Linux", however, that seems a bit over-the-top...The guy is clearly pro-Linux, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he's right.//

Thom Holwerda is clearly very confused about the meaning of the word 'bias'. In Thom's apparent view, being right has nothing to do with it, and a lack of bias can only be shown by presenting two opposing views on any topic, regardless if one view is clearly right and the other wrong.

Obviously Thom has got this concept totally, utterly and completely wrong, in the context of being a good editor. Thom is clearly the type of sucker that Phineas Barnum famously refered to in the quote that goes "there is one born every minute". This type of sucker is easily taken in by any cheap huckster with a plausible story ... in Thom's worldview to avoid bias one has to present the huckster's story as if it is gospel.

From Thom first we get "enough already" about any criticism by the EU of Microsoft's utter lack of interoperability, and now a person is "pro-everything-that-is-Linux" merely for accurately listing the attempts Microsoft has made so far to try to attack Linux.

Hey Thom, I thought you didn't like 'bias'? Have you ever heard the saying about people in glass houses, Thom?

Edited 2006-03-31 13:16

Reply Score: 1

New work for the IT jargon
by eantoranz on Thu 30th Mar 2006 17:56 UTC
eantoranz
Member since:
2005-12-18

I have a new word to add to the IT "slang". Just like "tuttle" means to threaten to call the FBI in case something is wrong with your computer (say you have windows installed or something like that), I want to propose a new word.

Just like vaporware is software that hasn't even been designed but it's already in the news....

Vistaware: Software that has already been delayed after having delayed and delayed.... and did I say it was delayed? What's this? 3-year delay by now? There you have it: Vistaware. What do you think? :-D

Reply Score: 5

RE: New work for the IT jargon
by kadymae on Thu 30th Mar 2006 20:39 UTC in reply to "New work for the IT jargon"
kadymae Member since:
2005-08-02

Vistaware: Software that has already been delayed after having delayed and delayed.... and did I say it was delayed? What's this? 3-year delay by now? There you have it: Vistaware. What do you think?

I think I'm already planning on working this into my next conversation with Systems.

{WEG}

Reply Score: 1

RE: New work for the IT jargon
by Kris on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:02 UTC in reply to "New work for the IT jargon"
Kris Member since:
2005-07-24

Vistaware sounds catchier than DukeNukemForeverWare so yeah I like the term.
And I'd like to declare Duke Nukem Forever to be Vistaware. Or maybe it's Vaporware after all, noone knows until it's done. And that'll be the day that it's done ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: New work for the IT jargon
by rcsteiner on Fri 31st Mar 2006 19:05 UTC in reply to "New work for the IT jargon"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

It isn't a new concept. Microsoft did it with Chicago, and they're still doing it with Cairo^H^H^H^H^HLonghorn^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HVista

Reply Score: 1

common theme
by DKR on Thu 30th Mar 2006 17:58 UTC
DKR
Member since:
2005-08-22

I like how Microsoft changes their opinions so quickly, especially when they resort to the "law".

Reply Score: 3

RE: common theme
by dylansmrjones on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:14 UTC in reply to "common theme"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Back in the old days when Microsoft was a small company Bill Gates was a fierce opponent of software patents (back in '85 when fighting Apple over icons), because software patents stiffled innovation.

SIC!

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: common theme
by Celerate on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:05 UTC in reply to "RE: common theme"
Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

And yet today Gates uses lawyers and patents to hurt innovation. I wonder if his attitude is "fair is fair" (which would only be true if he was using his patents against those who used theirs against him) or whether he's simply decided to become what he once hated. He also speaks up against DRM, but at the same time his company is building it into media formats and the OS itself. Under such conditions I cannot see Gates as anything other than a hypocrit when he decides to speak up in defence of public interest, anyone who belives him has mastered doublethink.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: common theme
by Varg Vikernes on Fri 31st Mar 2006 14:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: common theme"
Varg Vikernes Member since:
2005-07-06

And yet today Gates uses lawyers and patents to hurt innovation. I wonder if his attitude is "fair is fair" (which would only be true if he was using his patents against those who used theirs against him) or whether he's simply decided to become what he once hated.

Actually, IIRC Gates was for software patents, because he thought they spark inovation.

Can you provide some info where Gates used 'his lawyers and patents' to hurt inovation? AFAIK Microsoft only uses patents to protect themselves from possible lawsuits (take Eolas for example).

He also speaks up against DRM, but at the same time his company is building it into media formats and the OS itself. Under such conditions I cannot see Gates as anything other than a hypocrit when he decides to speak up in defence of public interest, anyone who belives him has mastered doublethink.

This is not something he has a word on. If you want to watch movies with Vista they HAVE TO do this. It's what Hollywood wants and not what (maybe) Gates wants. Also remember that he is against Blu Ray, because it doesn't allow for copying the content on the PC (or some shit like that, I'm way back with this HD thing).

Well, when Vista ships it will be the only OS capable of playing those movies, not becase Gates thinks it's fun to put 5 million lines of DRM code into the OS, but because that is what the companies that make those movies demand. You can either go their way and make money, or go the "right" way and loose money.

Also, I don't think anyone sane would say software patents are a bad thing. The way they are granted (and used) in US is a bad thing, but overall patents are a great thing. Wouldn't you want your invention patented so some big company couldn't steal it from you? Anyway, that's what they're suppossed to do.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: common theme
by Ookaze on Fri 31st Mar 2006 15:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: common theme"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

Can you provide some info where Gates used 'his lawyers and patents' to hurt inovation? AFAIK Microsoft only uses patents to protect themselves from possible lawsuits (take Eolas for example)

We're talking FUD here, not actual actions, try to stay focused.

This is not something he has a word on. If you want to watch movies with Vista they HAVE TO do this. It's what Hollywood wants and not what (maybe) Gates wants. Also remember that he is against Blu Ray, because it doesn't allow for copying the content on the PC (or some shit like that, I'm way back with this HD thing)

You mean he isn't consistent, and it's showing ? Like he doesn't say a word when he implements the bad (DRM), but have words when the bad is implemented by others he can't control (Blu Ray) and can't force its WMV on. I see what you mean. It's still the same MS as ever.

Well, when Vista ships it will be the only OS capable of playing those movies, not becase Gates thinks it's fun to put 5 million lines of DRM code into the OS, but because that is what the companies that make those movies demand

Windows apps are also the only ones able to play the latest MS video codecs, is it because that's what the movie company demand ?
Of course not, other better (standard) formats are proposed, and MS is trying to force their (non standard) codec on them.

Also, I don't think anyone sane would say software patents are a bad thing. The way they are granted (and used) in US is a bad thing, but overall patents are a great thing

And yet a lot of sane people say software patents are bad. Any way they are granted is irrelevant, they are still a bad thing.
And I trust lawyers (imagine that !) and the like more than you, who is mixing overall patents with software patents.

Wouldn't you want your invention patented so some big company couldn't steal it from you? Anyway, that's what they're suppossed to do

And that's not what they do for software
Try to apply your bullshit to "double click", "one click purchase" patents, so me and others can have a good laugh at how stupid someone can be.
People like you are amazing, living in some kind of fantasy.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Excellent article
by archiesteel on Thu 30th Mar 2006 18:16 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Exactly, which is why I see this latest statement by the simiesque MS CEO as pure FUD.

First, they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win...

Reply Score: 3

Communism
by KenJackson on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:16 UTC
KenJackson
Member since:
2005-07-18

And it had, you know, the characteristics of communism that people love so very, very much about it. (Steve Ballmer in 2000).

Fortunately, I've never lived under anything like communism. But from what I understand, those who have don't like it very much at all. So the statement is self-contradictory.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Communism
by archiesteel on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:27 UTC in reply to "Communism"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

But from what I understand, those who have don't like it very much at all. So the statement is self-contradictory.

I believe it was a sarcasm.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Communism
by kaiwai on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:22 UTC in reply to "Communism"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Fortunately, I've never lived under anything like communism. But from what I understand, those who have don't like it very much at all. So the statement is self-contradictory.

Considering that these so-called 'communist countries' are not actually implementing what could be classed as communism, the idea of calling GPL communist is stupid at best.

In the OSS world, lets compare it to, say, Acts of the Apostles (I've always wondered whether Karl Marx based his idea on parts of the bible - even though he was an avowed atheist) of communal ownership of code; those who can contribute, contribute and those who wish to benefit from those contributions are free to do so.

Those who contribute to an OSS project do so volunteerily; no one forces them to contribute to these projects, free of charge; these people choose to. Those who use this software, also give back in the way of bug reports, and word of mouth marketing.

What Balmer hates is this; the idea that there are people developing software in little 'communes', each project solving a problem in a certain way that meets the needs of the developers and the users.

The Red Hat, Novell or some other distribution will create a 'bundle' of these - which they consider as meeting the needs of customers (and make contributions back), include support and sell it as a boxed or downloadable product.

Microsoft could do something like that, but what it would mean is they would have to conduct a major overhaul and rationalisation of their budgets, they would also have to pay close attention to the needs of their users, and most of all, they would have razor thin margins requiring them to keep their eye on the ball rather than resting on their lorals, as with the case of Internet Explorer.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Communism
by Soulbender on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:47 UTC in reply to "Communism"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Fortunately, I've never lived under anything like communism. But from what I understand, those who have don't like it very much at all."

It's not unlike having to use Microsoft products.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Communism
by gustl on Fri 31st Mar 2006 12:06 UTC in reply to "Communism"
gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

You US-Americans have a distorted picture in your minds about what communism is.

What you meant to say is: "Fortunately, I've never lived under anything like DICTATORSHIP"

Communism in it's true meaning is just how most families are structured. The families have common goods they use, like a house or flat, they eat from the same table. That is communism.

The question if communism can work or not, is related to the scale of the community.

Communism will not work where millions, thousands or hundreds of people are in the society, China, North Korea and USSR have proven that every communist country will transform into a bad dictatorship.

Some communities in Israel who have structures resembling communism have close to 100 members, and they manage to live quite good lifes. It seems that this is the upper border for a communistic society which actually works. In families communism is usual, not the exception.

The fathers of communism (Marx, Lenin) thought that a system like in a usual family should be expanded to the whole country. It was a failure, the ones who were the most reckless won the run to the top job and communism itself has no correction implemented if the wrong person comes to power. Democracy has such a correction implemented, that is the reason why it works (more or less ;) ).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Communism
by dylansmrjones on Fri 31st Mar 2006 17:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Communism"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Communism is not at all like a family.

Communism is the biggest marketing lie ever in history.
You have to look at Communism and the slogans of Communism the same way Gimli looked at Sarumans words.

When a Communist says Peace, it actually means war.
When he says Freedom, it actually means Dictaturship.
And so on.

Communism is a dictaturship of the Proletarians and as such it is evil as all forms of dictaturship.

Consider it the opposite of Anarchism.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Communism
by samad on Sat 1st Apr 2006 15:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Communism"
samad Member since:
2006-03-31

According to so-called Marxists, capitalism has contempt for the average man. That is, you have a corporate autocracy that tells workers what to do. And their power is not morally and, more interestingly, not economically justified. Now that's not just Marxists. Many other shades of political thought outside of Marxism also accept that belief: that the average man shouldn't be marched around, and a more just society is where each individual controls his or her fate. The entire philosophy of liberal society is based on that idea. That's why individual rights is the basis for the legal system. Of course, going back to Lenin, he too had contempt for the average man. The purpose of Leninism is to create some kind of political entity that orders around the working class to a revolution. Now this political entity is supposed to be so benign as to eventually hand power over to the working class. Of course history tells us another story. We don't need to talk about Stalin since I'm sure everyone here knows about the purges and the gulags. I don't think Leninist-style government has failed because the idea of sharing doesn't work. It failed because it was also supposed to be a benign power system, and it definitely wasn't. You mention the kibbutzim, but you also forgot native Indians where many tribes lived in communal societies for hundreds, maybe thousands, of years. These societies are far greater in size than the average kibbutz.

Reply Score: 1

Microsoft Advantages
by Peter Besenbruch on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:45 UTC
Peter Besenbruch
Member since:
2006-03-13

From what I read, Microsoft has an advantage in server administration, something that they should push more.

Microsoft's constant lies cause them more harm than good: They mask what may be real advantages. They reduce credibility; no-one would believe them should they trumpet the real benefits of running Windows.

Finally, by focussing on the imagined external enemy of Linux, Microsoft avoids looking at its own shortcomings, flaws ably set forth by the Guardian article.

Personally, I thought that the article in Lxer was an accurate reflection of what Microsoft has been doing. If Balmer and Co. continue with their actions, they will continue to harm themselves.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Microsoft Advantages
by sanders on Fri 31st Mar 2006 08:22 UTC in reply to "Microsoft Advantages"
sanders Member since:
2005-08-09

From what I read, Microsoft has an advantage in server administration, something that they should push more.

I would say on the contrary. I wouldn't advise someone to use Linux over Windows as a desktop/office system, but I can't understand why anyone would use Windows as a server.

We do here at work, and it happens all the time that a nightly build is stopped half way because some program pops up a confirmation dialog box, halting all the rest.

If a person needs to walk up to a server (or VNC into it, which is basically the same thing) to "click away a dialog", it's not a viable server platform IMHO.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Microsoft Advantages
by Angel--Fr@gzill@ on Fri 31st Mar 2006 13:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Microsoft Advantages"
Angel--Fr@gzill@ Member since:
2005-12-23

!!!

"I would say on the contrary. I wouldn't advise someone to use Linux over Windows as a desktop/office system, but I can't understand why anyone would use Windows as a server"

---

Well, I agree with most of what you say in your post, but not in this...

Why you would NOT advise someone to use Linux over Windows as a desktop/office system???

I DO ADVICE people to use Linux as a Desktop, (even BSD)! And even if they use also Windows.

YOu have really plenty of easy to use and quick to learn, and ergonomic Linux Distros nowdays: PCLinuxOs, Mepis, SuSe, K/Ubuntu, Xandros, Linspire, Kanotix, BLAG, Vector, RR4, ZenWalk, ARK, LinuxXP, Elive, Fox, Knopix, aLinux, STX, Underground, Morphix, Wolvix, YellowDog, Slax, DreamLinux, Mandriva, MyahOS, Tuquito, Aurox, Musix, rPath, Beatrix, Kurumin etc., with everything you need for the desktop and much more...

If you start from cero, or from the basics, it would be easier to use one of those distros than Windows! And they are much more completed (having most things preinstalled) than Windows, and they are easy to update via internt too. Almost the same could be said about DesktopBSD or PC-BSD...

Linux is a superior Desktop OS than Windows today. Noo exageration, no joke... !!!

Is the "following the mass" attitude, mainly, among other things that prevent many people to change to, or to start using Linux as a Desktop OS...

!!!

Reply Score: 1

Goes both ways
by TaterSalad on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:47 UTC
TaterSalad
Member since:
2005-07-06

Microsoft may sling FUD, but Linux slings it as well.

1998: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2001: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2003: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2005: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2006: Vista is late? This is the year of the linux desktop!

I don't need to mention how the 60% rewrite got blown out of proportion by linux users.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Goes both ways
by KenJackson on Thu 30th Mar 2006 20:05 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Yes, yes, and even the author said one paper "was not commissioned by Microsoft, but by the Open Source Development Labs, who were showing that they could fight fire with fire."

But consider an important difference. The Microsoft FUD is well organized, coming from one tightly focused origin. Whereas the open source community is not one entity but an array of different individuals and companies with many different interests.

When you listen to a bunch of different people say the same thing, it rings truer.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Goes both ways
by somebody on Thu 30th Mar 2006 20:53 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

Microsoft may sling FUD, but Linux slings it as well.

1998: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2001: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2003: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2005: This is the year of the linux desktop!
2006: Vista is late? This is the year of the linux desktop!

I don't need to mention how the 60% rewrite got blown out of proportion by linux users.


??? Now this is funny. Talking about overblowing 60% rewrite and in the same comment you've overblown "year of desktop linux" statement.

For all uninformed like you...
Year of linux means significant increase in number of desktops in the wild, not Linux taking over the world with 100%.

Truth is, every year has been year of Linux desktop.

Reply Score: 5

v RE[2]: Goes both ways
by TaterSalad on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
RE[3]: Goes both ways
by dylansmrjones on Fri 31st Mar 2006 00:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Goes both ways"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Woot!?!?!? Nobody has ever claimed that the meaning of "Year of the Linux" is equal to Linux having a larger marketshare than Microsoft.

Nobody has ever claimed that Linux had a larger marketshare on the desktop.

Fact is every year is the year of linux, because linux just keeps growing and growing, having growth rates far beyond anything Microsoft have tried.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Goes both ways
by Omega Penguin on Thu 30th Mar 2006 21:26 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
Omega Penguin Member since:
2006-02-12

No one really can predict when Linux will become widespread.Linux is a better desktop choice than XP at the moment,but we don't know if that will be true when Vista comes out.Also,we need to see if Novell convinces any companies to sell SuSE on their computers.I believe that the year of the Linux desktop will be between 2008-2011,but I can't be sure.

Reply Score: 1

v RE[2]: Goes both ways
by TaterSalad on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
RE[3]: Goes both ways
by JLF65 on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Goes both ways"
JLF65 Member since:
2005-07-06

> > Linux is a better desktop choice than XP at the moment
>
> For who? Certainitly not for me or my employer.

Unless you have a game that is only available for Windows and doesn't work in WINE or Cedega, Windows is clearly inferior for the average home user. Linux has all the internet tools the average user wants (browser, email, usenet, p2p, im), it has media playing at least equal to anything on Windows (mplayer, xine, vlc), it has document tools sufficient for home use (openoffice, koffice, abiword, gimp, etc), and is more hardened against malware out of the box than any currently available version of Windows.

Much of the same can be said for small businesses as well. Unless your business has some custom Windows-only app that doesn't work in WINE or Crossover Office, or some MS vendor lock-in issue, linux is CLEARLY better.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Goes both ways
by Soulbender on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Goes both ways"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Linux has all the internet tools the average user wants"

Nah, it has everything the average user *needs* but unfortunately users also *wants* a lot of crap like Bonzai Buddy, Comet Cursor and other such garbage.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Goes both ways
by rcsteiner on Fri 31st Mar 2006 20:59 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Goes both ways"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

Hey, even decade-old-OS/2 has comet cursors, animated mouse pointers, and animated window frames.

I thought the Linux desktop was "modern"... :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Goes both ways
by Babi Asu on Fri 31st Mar 2006 13:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Goes both ways"
Babi Asu Member since:
2006-02-11

Unless you have a game that is only available for Windows and doesn't work in WINE or Cedega, Windows is clearly inferior for the average home user.

You must be kidding. Windows is very good environment for commercial games. Game developers who aim Linux market game must prepare to be bankrupt because no one will buy Linux game unless it is GPL ;)

Linux has all the internet tools the average user wants (browser, email, usenet, p2p, im), it has media playing at least equal to anything on Windows (mplayer, xine, vlc), it has document tools sufficient for home use (openoffice, koffice, abiword, gimp, etc), and is more hardened against malware out of the box than any currently available version of Windows.

Almost of all the application you mentioned also available in Windows. XP SP2 is also hardened.

Much of the same can be said for small businesses as well. Unless your business has some custom Windows-only app that doesn't work in WINE or Crossover Office, or some MS vendor lock-in issue, linux is CLEARLY better.

Better for who? It's better for geeks, but not for average users.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Goes both ways
by Ookaze on Fri 31st Mar 2006 14:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Goes both ways"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

Game developers who aim Linux market game must prepare to be bankrupt because no one will buy Linux game unless it is GPL ;)

This is BS. Some Linux users even buy software like Cedega to be able to run games because game devs refuse to develop for Linux (and OpenGL).

Almost of all the application you mentioned also available in Windows. XP SP2 is also hardened

Except that most of them are crippled on Windows (except perhaps those tailored for Windows like OOo). Gimp, Abiword, most Gnome apps are completely crippled on Windows, because Windows lacks all the fantastic framework Linux has. For KDE apps, it's even worse for now, as KDE version is for Cygwin, not even Windows, and is several versions back. You just can't compare the experience of Linux apps on Linux and Windows.
And XP SP2 may be hardened compared to XP, it still left behind by 2001 Linux distros. In 2001, (even in 1998) an end user would not have to fear clicking everything in an email, a user would not have to launch every usual apps each time it logged in his session, and even better, the desktop could stay up for months without problem. This is some things that make Linux better for the average user. I didn't even chose these examples, these are some of the things my wife told me about her desktop at home, compared to what she had at work (she don't even know MS, or what Windows is, but she knows Excel and Word).

Better for who? It's better for geeks, but not for average users

My wife could tell you some things about what average users find better. She sure enough find her KDE desktop better than the Windows XP (and Windows 2000) she has at work. The simple fact that she is annoyed at work, because she has to have 2 PCs, as one app can't work on one of them, is telling.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Goes both ways
by Angel--Fr@gzill@ on Fri 31st Mar 2006 15:20 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Goes both ways"
Angel--Fr@gzill@ Member since:
2005-12-23

!!!

"You must be kidding. Windows is very good environment for commercial games. Game developers who aim Linux market game must prepare to be bankrupt because no one will buy Linux game unless it is GPL ;) "

---

NO. Sorry, WRONG... You can ;) smile, but you don't get it!

If there are less games that run in Linux than in Windows is not because people will not buy it unless is GPL... A lot of people that is not that much concerned with GPL issues, and The Free software movement is already using Linux! But there are still much less Linux desktop users than windows users.

It is simply a question of economies of scale. And it is so, for the games, as for any other kind of software running in Linux... If there are much less people using Linux as a desktop or games PC, there are less possibilities of producing in scale economies for Linux.

That is why some games companies do not release Linux versions of the games... not because people would not buy it if they are not GPL. Some would, some would not!

The more people using Linux, the easier will be that more games or other software is released in binaries for Linux OS...

Anyway, there are already a good number or very good Games for Linux that belong to the Linux/Free-Open Source Software:

- Nexuiz,
- Cube,
- Frozen bubble,
- Neverball,
- Nerverputt,
- Penguin racer,
- Tuxcart,
- Chromium,
- SuperTux,
- Battle for Wesnoth, etc.

And there are already also a good number or very good Games for Linux, released in Windows, that are not Free-Open Source Software:

- DOOM Series,(DOOM I, DOOM II, DOOM III)
- Quake series (Quake, QuakeII, QuakeIII, QuakeIV)
- Wolfenstein series -(Wolfenstein, Return to casttle Wolfenstein, etc)
- Enemy Territory
- Unreal series (Unreal, Unreal tournamet 2004 etc
- Privateer
- America's Army
- Soldier of Fortune
- Legends
- UFO, Alien Invasion
- NeverWinter Nights
- Civilization: Call to Power
- Myth II: Soulblighter
- Railroad Tycoon II
- Eric's Ultimate Solitaire
- Heretic II
- Heroes of Might and Magic III
- Heavy Gear II
- SimCity 3000
- Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
- Descent3
- MindRover
- Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns
- Tribes 2
- Rune
- Heavy Metal: F.A.K.K.2
- Postal Plus
- Rune: Halls of Valhalla
- Deus Ex
- Railroad Tycoon II
etc.

I'm not an expert in gaming myself , but you can check www.lokigames.com/ , or other Linux games sites, if you are interested. It is also possible to compile others...

And the funny thing is that they run better an quicker in Linux (with the propietary, closed drivers) than in Windows. In due time they will run also better with the open source drivers...

!!!

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Goes both ways
by ma_d on Fri 31st Mar 2006 16:55 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Goes both ways"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Privateer belongs under Free as it has been remade using the vega strike engine.
Search for Privateer Remake.

Also, you forgot Vegastrike, a promising engine with a few smaller games made with it.

And btw, Privateer is an awesome game. It's like an MMORPG without the network and obnoxious people. Oh, those are RPG's ;) .

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Goes both ways
by samad on Sat 1st Apr 2006 15:49 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Goes both ways"
samad Member since:
2006-03-31

Now of course many people will think that Linux as a user platform works fine, others like you don't think it's ready for the user. The good thing about Linux is that it's evolving. Five years ago the average Linux distribution would be practically unusable compared to today's standards. Everyone out there shouldn't complain that you don't like OSS. Rather, everyone should listen to yours' and others' complaints of it and continue to develop to meet yours' and everybodys' needs.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Goes both ways
by phoenix on Fri 31st Mar 2006 00:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Goes both ways"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Depends on your uses and requirements.

For us, Linux is a much better fit on the desktop than XP. Even Windows 98 is a better fit than XP.

In fact, we've rolled out over 1000 Linux desktops (actually thin-clients) into all our elementary school labs (37 schools with 30-45 PCs), in 3 of our secondary tech ed/CAD labs (30 PCs ea), in 2 of our secondary business ed labs (20-30 PCs ea), on all the programmer/sysadmins workstations in the IT dept including the helpdesk, and will be migrating all PCs in one secondary school to Linux next year.

There are quite a few school districts up here (British Columbia, Canada) that have or are planning to move to Linux-based desktop stations in the elemtary and secondary schools.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Goes both ways
by archiesteel on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:30 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

All these years have been the year of the Linux desktop, because it has improved significantly in every one of them.

That said, your comparison is flawed. Saying "this is the year of the Linux desktop" is neither Fear, Uncertainty nor Doubt. Also, this hasn't been a statement from the CEO of a leading Linux company, unlike the statement from Ballmer.

In other words, your argument fails miserably on all counts.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[2]: Goes both ways
by TaterSalad on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
v RE: Goes both ways
by TaterSalad on Fri 31st Mar 2006 01:04 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
RE[2]: Goes both ways
by JLF65 on Fri 31st Mar 2006 01:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
JLF65 Member since:
2005-07-06

The others might not fit any of those categories, but that one certainly IS off-topic. ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Goes both ways
by monkeyhead on Sat 1st Apr 2006 02:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
monkeyhead Member since:
2005-07-11

TaterSalad said:

Ok, why are my comments getting modded down?

{snip}

I did not include personal attacks, its not off-topic, and its not spam. The only one I can see is that you disagree with me and that won't mod me down. Is this a case of where someone talks bad about linux they must be modded? It sure looks that way.


Okay... I give into linux zealotry on occasion, but I agree that it's bullshit that half of your posts got modded below the default threshold.

Anyway, I don't agree with you, but I wasted my votes to mod+ your comments.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Goes both ways
by naelurec on Fri 31st Mar 2006 04:31 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
naelurec Member since:
2006-02-15

The year of the linux desktop for me happened in 2003. For my friends it was 2004 .. for a local K-8 school, late 2005. The fact is, Linux usage on the desktop is growing. Each year it gets better and more capable. Each year more people find it meets their computing needs better than alternatives.

Will it be the end-all of desktop environments? I hope not. Competition is good.

Perhaps this wasn't the response you were expecting. Perhaps you were expecting "the year of the linux desktop" to equate to a 1-2% market share expanding to 40% or more of the market. Needless to say, thats unrealistic. Perhaps some day.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Goes both ways
by Soulbender on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:40 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"1998: This is the year of the linux desktop!"
etc etc
That's not FUD, that's inaccurate predictions.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Goes both ways
by kaiwai on Fri 31st Mar 2006 07:45 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

1) People who claimed 'year of the desktop' are journalists, the same people who claimed that Itanium would bankrupt SUN Microsystems over night, the same ones who claimed that Windows XP was going to be the most secure Windows yet, the same ones who pick companies and cheerlead around them, no matter what facts are put forward disproveing their hype.

2) If a single Windows end user claims that 'Windows is the best', how is his or her claims any more valid than an individual who says that linux is a superior product?

3) The 60% re-write was NEVER unearthed by linux users, but Windows fanboys cheerleading around Windows Vista; then doing a quick back peddling trying to make out things aren't as bad as they seem.

Why should a linux end user give a brass wazoo about what Microsoft is doing? I use Linux - what Microsoft does is of little or no interest to me as I am not affected by what ever 'grand vision' they might have; what I'm concerned about is GNOME, Xorg and Fedora development - thats where my excitement is.

4) I think the old KDE slogan put it best, 'Is the desktop ready for UNIX' - having moved back to Linux (after leaving it 5 years ago), Fedora Core 5 has really pushed up the bar in terms of what end users will expect when they run Linux as a desktop operating system.

Now sure, there are some tweaks here and there, but by enlarge, I don't understand what the complaints are about.

DVD playback? I've got a DVD player on my TV. Games? who cares, get an XBox or P3 (once released) and never have to worry about playing catch up in regards to the ever increasing system requirements PC games seem to have.

In terms of hardware support, my Audigy is working great, my iPod is supported out of the box, be with some small tweaking, and my digital camera (HP Photosmart M307) works out of the box with F-Spot Photomanager. So for me, the 'Linux desktop' has finally arrived - for others, their option could be looking at getting a machine with MacOS X, but given how much Linux has progressed in 5 years, its gone from nothing to a cold UNIX operating system with a basic interface ontop to something in 2006 resembles the type of ease of use found in Windows XP (and in some cases, superior - consistancy in GNOME for example).

Reply Score: 3

RE: Goes both ways
by gustl on Fri 31st Mar 2006 12:31 UTC in reply to "Goes both ways"
gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

Well, I started with Linux 1996. Back then it was not really usable for me, just a hobby, because the applications available were not satisfying.

No WYSIWYG Office, no CAD, no decent graphical file management, ...

1998 I had Word Perfect and KDE and Netscape, so I could do most of my daily tasks in Linux. For things I could not do on Linux, I still had Windows.

As the Linux desktop matured, I gradually moved one task after the other over to Linux, now I am using Windows only for playing games, and even that becomes less and less necessary.

MY year of the desktop was 1998 or 1999, that were the years when I tarted to dominantly use Linux.

Nowadays, the year of the Linux desktop is not so much a question of "are the applications available", but rather "am I interested enough to learn it".

Most people COULD use Linux as a Desktop, but these same people also COULD use Windows. Nowadays they mostly use Windows not because Windows is much better, but because Windows is good enough, they can get MS Office Professional and Corel Photoshop on the black market gratis, and because it comes pre-installed with their machine.

I once made a list of software I regularly use on my Linux machine, and calculated the costs if I had to buy equivalent proprietary software in the shop. Even if I take the cheapest software available, I would still end up with approximately 4000$ for software. Thats 3-4 times a decent new hardware!
And with a Linux distribution this all comes either gratis, or for the price of 300$ (if you insist on getting support).
I hope that the new DRM features of Vista will get widely used by the software manufacturers to prevent pirating. That would drive the people towards Open Source Software, and lots of them would go and install Linux.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Goes both ways
by sbergman27 on Fri 31st Mar 2006 21:54 UTC in reply to "RE: Goes both ways"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Actually, my year of the Linux desktop was late 1996, early 1997. (Slackware '96 with a switch to RedHat 4.2 in the spring, IIRC.) I had tried Linux before, but it just wasn't there yet. Of course, I didn't have much need for WYSIWYG office software at the time. But wasn't Applixware around back then?

Reply Score: 1

Microsoft has co-opted open-source
by ewright on Thu 30th Mar 2006 19:49 UTC
ewright
Member since:
2005-07-21

Microsoft has clearly co-opted the best of open-source culture. Their development culture is now extremely open, with direct programmer engagement thru blogs, Channel9, etc. Conferences such as MIX06 and PDC reveal products and directions very early in the cycle, and provide bits to try out and provide feedback on.

This stands in stark contrast to Google, for example, who doesn't discuss anything whatsoever until it is released. I believe that Microsoft has transcended that mode of operation.

People who are actually serious about predicting the future of computing should be honest with themselves about Microsoft's strengths.

Read the recent leaked memo from Ray Ozzie for some true insight into Microsoft (much more insightful IMO than the topic article).

http://www.scripting.com/disruption/ozzie/TheInternetServicesDisrup...

Edited 2006-03-30 19:53

Reply Score: 2

Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

So basically what you're saying is that Microsoft has opened itslef up to media coverage the likes of which other companies would not allow. Media coverage and source code are two different things.

Microsoft may be putting in an attempt to get more PR by speaking more openly and divulging more secrets about their upcomming products, but how does that compare to investing time and money into a product which is then benevolently made available, source code and all to the public?

I think you've missed the point of this one. This is not about which company allows the most on-campus video cameras taping what the company wants people to see, it's about Microsoft playing dirty in the competition between it's products and open source software.

Reply Score: 4

ewright Member since:
2005-07-21

Microsoft is a ruthless and brilliant company. They have co-opted the open-source culture - community involvement, agile development - to ensure that they make the best possible products and grow the Windows platform. The rationale goes far beyond PR.

The topic of this conversation is "what's eating Microsoft". Insofar as we are contemplating their mindset and their future, it behoves us to acknowledge their strengths and, frankly, the weaknesses of Linux.

I personally believe that Microsoft will beat +the promise+ of Linux, which is to replace Windows as the platform for computing around the world. They will do this with superior planning and product, regardless of any underhanded legal tactics they employ. I am not making an ethical argument per say, I just acknowledge how their formula tends to win.

Reply Score: 1

Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

Either you have an unrealistic admiration for Microsoft, or you're someone from their marketing department.

"They have co-opted the open-source culture"

Co-opted is:
1. To elect as a fellow member of a group.
2. To appoint summarily.
3. To take or assume for one's own use; appropriate: co-opted the criticism by embracing it.
4. To neutralize or win over
If you're implying number 1 then you're wrong, open and open-source are not the same. Also Microsoft controlls as much about the media about them as they can, you see what they want you to see, that's a very limited interpretation of open. Number 2 wouldn't be true, number 3 is in some ways true, and number 4 would be wishfull thinking.

"community involvement, agile development - to ensure that they make the best possible products and grow the Windows platform. "

I'm getting a very disturbing mental picture of bum cheeks covered in red lip prints.

"The topic of this conversation is "what's eating Microsoft". Insofar as we are contemplating their mindset and their future, it behoves us to acknowledge their strengths and, frankly, the weaknesses of Linux. "

You're saying lots of good thing about Microsoft without any slight mention of any of their flaws, yet you say nothing good about Linux, you only say something about "the weakness of Linux" which you did not elaborate on. As it is I am left to assume that the "weakness of Linux" is your way of trying to exaggerate the fact that like any other OS, Linux is not 100% perfect (yet you come across just short of implying that Windows is).

"I personally believe that Microsoft will beat +the promise+ of Linux, which is to replace Windows as the platform for computing around the world."

Ok, it's your personal belief. I think you're ringing the victory bell far too soon though.

"They will do this with superior planning and product,"

Well that is really a matter of opinion, I have to say I think you're all wrong. I strongly feel that you are very partial to Microsoft in a dangerously ignorant way. You are idolizing them.

"regardless of any underhanded legal tactics they employ. I am not making an ethical argument per say, I just acknowledge how their formula tends to win."

Only time will tell, you could be right or you could be the crazy guy on the street corner fortelling the end of the world, I'm trying (and just barely managing) to refrain from expressing my prediction on this one :-) .

Reply Score: 1

ewright Member since:
2005-07-21

I mean 3.

It is a simple fact that Microsoft is trying to "make the best possible products and grow the Windows platform". That doesn't necessarily mean that they will, simply that they +intend to+. Your comment on the use of open-source development techniques (obviously without the source) for mere PR is simplistic.

The story concludes that Microsoft will lose. It is in that context that I argue that "Microsoft [has] strengths" and "Linux [has] weaknesses" that go unmentioned by the author. I am referring to Linux the platform/movement, not the product in particular.

It would be downright foolish to bet on Microsoft's demise due to poor product. Microsoft is, as Stalin would say, a "labor army", and a talented one at that. Indeed, .NET, XP SP2, and Server 2003 are great products. It's a simple fact that Microsoft has prioritized security, manageability, and developer productivity, two of which are relative weaknesses of Linux.

What if I told you I am pro-Linux and I +fear+ Microsoft's (likely) success? Do any of my statements actually contradict that?

Microsoft is clearly not going to roll over and give up. They will do +anything+ to remain the world's main computing platform, including (apparently to the shock of many in the Linux community) build great products. Linux had better continue to innovate - start with Standard Linux Base - or face defeat.

Edited 2006-04-01 22:39

Reply Score: 1

Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

"Your comment on the use of open-source development techniques (obviously without the source) for mere PR is simplistic."

I wouldn't say it's simplistic, but rather that it is within the scope of the article whereas yours is broad enough to make just about any company look saintly with the right wording.

"The story concludes that Microsoft will lose. It is in that context that I argue that "Microsoft [has] strengths" and "Linux [has] weaknesses" that go unmentioned by the author. I am referring to Linux the platform/movement, not the product in particular."

Frankly the truth by your definition is that every platform and the ideals behind it have strenghts and weaknesses. It's so broad in that sense that no one wins.

"What if I told you I am pro-Linux and I +fear+ Microsoft's (likely) success? Do any of my statements actually contradict that?"

Microsoft is already successfull, or at least was. Lets face it, Microsoft had a huge peak, they dipped over 90% user share in a time when there were probably well over a billion people using computers if I'm not mistaken, and now they're very slowly fluctuating downards. This is the first time a company with the iron grip Microsoft had is being cut down, the first time always takes very long because people have no prior history of similar enough events to draw from, everyone is a skeptic and that stalls progress.

"Microsoft is clearly not going to roll over and give up. They will do +anything+ to remain the world's main computing platform, including (apparently to the shock of many in the Linux community) build great products. Linux had better continue to innovate - start with Standard Linux Base - or face defeat."

Ok, they cand build their "great products", open source developers can build greater ones if they want. Really people are in fear because of the size of Microsoft, some of it's software does have more features but that's just because companies funding open source software have yet to put their heart into it. Microsoft may be a giant of our time, but it's a giant made of people no different than then their counterparts outside of Microsoft.

Reply Score: 1

search
by Mellin on Thu 30th Mar 2006 22:35 UTC
Mellin
Member since:
2005-07-06

search for Linux on google and microsoft is number one in the paid section with Linux vs Windows

Reply Score: 1

v Patents and why they are needed
by proforma on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:24 UTC
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Patents are solely used to prevent competition and stiffle innovation.

Reply Score: 4

rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

A patent is intended to give a short-term exclusive right to produce that which is covered by the patent, so it prevents competition BY DEFINITION.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/index.html#patent

"The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant itself, “the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling” the invention in the United States or “importing” the invention into the United States. What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention."

Reply Score: 2

Celerate Member since:
2005-06-29

Too true, and by allowing patents to be extended so they are interminable they are quite literally a virtually endless legal grant for a monopoly.

Reply Score: 1

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Short Term isn't 20 years. And in a business as fast moving as the Software Industry short term is less than a year.

There should be no protection, and if there is protection should only be long enough to get the product on the market. And no more.

But this protection is only needed if other people can take your "innovation" and patent it.

Reply Score: 1

Sic transit
by moleskine on Thu 30th Mar 2006 23:30 UTC
moleskine
Member since:
2005-11-05

Microsoft is all about building a better prison. Of course they cannot say that's what they are doing, and they may genuinely believe they are welcoming their "guests" to a luxurious hotel set in wild and unspoiled country. But in the end it is still all about restrictions and lock-in. Just my 2 cents, but this simple contradiction lies behind all Microsoft's fud-mongering and bad temper and will for as long as Microsoft exists. They say they want to make you free, but in fact they first have to enslave you, otherwise they can't make any money.

I liked the Guardian's analogy, that Microsoft is being gradually eaten away by an army of ants. Ants can eat their way through anything, even a prison. Eventually all that will be left of Microsoft's lock-up will be rubble and dust. Couldn't happen to nicer guys, could it?

Reply Score: 3

You guys are missing the point
by samad on Fri 31st Mar 2006 04:06 UTC
samad
Member since:
2006-03-31

Microsoft is a corporation. Like all corporations, their bottom line is profit. As many of you guys are saying, "Microsft lies." Yeah, well no shit Sherlock. All corporations lie. Tobacco companies say cigarettes don't kill, and fast food companies say their food isn't that bad for your health. Is it true? Nope. The point is to make their consumers-and more importantly-their investors are happy. Saying Microsoft produces terrible code is pointless. The underlying assumption of that statement is that Microsoft, in order to uphold its engineering integrity, should produce better code. That assessment is entirely baseless. It's like saying McDonald's needs to uphold their culinary integrity. Do they? Nope. Now I'm sure some of you guys out there will say that I'm talking Marxism or Communism, but I'm not. The thing we should understand is that the OSF and OSS in general has created a space for programmers to develop good software outside of the corporate system. Is it any wonder that OSS software, whose developers have peanuts compared to the resources that Microsoft has, can compete with corporate software? Nope. Programmers who write software on their own, out of their own free will, without having someone telling them what to write, will do a better job.

Reply Score: 2

The Wozniak example
by KenJackson on Fri 31st Mar 2006 11:25 UTC in reply to "You guys are missing the point"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

All corporations lie.

After Steve Wozniak cofounded Apple and took it from the garage to Fortune 500 in 5 years, he went back to college under a false identity so his professors wouldn't know who he was.

Years ago I read an interview with him where he said he would argue with his business and economics professors that made just your kind of argument. In the interview he claimed Apple did well because they gave the customer a good product and treated them fairly and honestly. But in class he couldn't reference his experience without blowing his identity, so he just argued the point. One professor asked him something like, "Who do you think you are?"

I'm not an Apple fan, but I love that story. And I believe that the best corporations DON'T lie and yet can become very profitable.

The thing we should understand is that the OSF and OSS in general has created a space for programmers to develop good software outside of the corporate system.

Excellent point.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Goes both ways
by archiesteel on Fri 31st Mar 2006 05:54 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Yes it has, not in those exact words though. Many months ago when Novell was PR'ing out Suse 10 they said it was going to take over Microsoft on the desktop and be the enterprise solution. So my arguement holds on all accounts.

Not it hasn't. Again, it wasn't FUD, it was a sales pitch. Hint: FUD is directed against someone - saying that it's the year of the Linux desktop may be optimistic, but it's pro Linux, not anti Windows.

I don't think you understand what FUD means. If MS says that Vista will be the best thing since sliced bread, that isn't FUD. When they hint at using patents to attack Linux, that's FUD. Do you see the difference?

Next, show me the quote from a Linux CEO saying that "this is the year of the Linux desktop". I want a quote, not some vague recollections. You should be able to find it using this great Linux-powered service called Google...

Reply Score: 3

Linux take-up
by ohbrilliance on Fri 31st Mar 2006 08:14 UTC
ohbrilliance
Member since:
2005-07-07

I haven't seen any stats for Linux usage in a long while, but just a quick look at awstats for the month of March on a web site I manage (a general-interest web site that doesn't restrict the browser or OS in any way):

OS Hits Percent
Windows 2847875 94.9 %
Macintosh 109759 3.6 %
Unknown 36233 1.2 %
Linux 5307 0.1 %

Is this an anomily? I'm interested in more encouraging stats if anybody has any.

FWIW, the year of Linux for me was 2004. I use Linux solely at home, and for development and deployment at work.

Edited 2006-03-31 08:19

Reply Score: 1

RE: Linux take-up
by Varg Vikernes on Fri 31st Mar 2006 14:37 UTC in reply to "Linux take-up"
Varg Vikernes Member since:
2005-07-06

Stats from some random site don't really mean much.

FWIW, the year of Linux for me was 2004. I use Linux solely at home, and for development and deployment at work.

I'm literally quite sick of this "year of Linux" bullshit. If anything, this will be the year of Mac. Linux is nowhere near the desktop radar while the Mac got so much publicity this year it would be insane if it doesn't catch up.

Reply Score: 0

Microsoft is on the wrong path.
by axilmar on Fri 31st Mar 2006 10:16 UTC
axilmar
Member since:
2006-03-20

Microsoft tries to conquer the world instead of improving its software. What Windows should have been by now? it should have been a collection of modules highly indepentent of each other, all garbage collected, coded with formal proofs where possible and implementing the standards. Instead of that, they have a poor collection of highly coupled C routines where everything is manually managed and correctness can be violated in many ways, and they have their own standards. At least Unix/Linux is much more modular and standards-compliant than Windows.

Computers/software pretty much defines modern society, so it is one of the commodities that belongs to all. Microsoft tries to own sofware...they are on the wrong path.

Reply Score: 1

hmmmm....
by BluenoseJake on Fri 31st Mar 2006 11:10 UTC
BluenoseJake
Member since:
2005-08-11

I believe this article is a classic example of FUD, it's a rare industry where one company doesn't bad mouth another organization/technology/process. People have been badmouthing MS for years, doesn't seem to be a problem, FUD is something that they all do, it's part of the business, it stinks, but that's the truth

Reply Score: 1

The thing I hate about Ballmer...
by Varg Vikernes on Fri 31st Mar 2006 14:44 UTC
Varg Vikernes
Member since:
2005-07-06

The things I hate about Ballmer the most is how he just asks for someone to kick the shit out of him. I think this guy is solely responsible why some people hate Microsoft. Instead of saying something like "we think our product is better, becase..." he jumps right off with something like "people who use it are communists...". I seriously can't think of a single reason why saying this is neccesary or how it could benefit their company. It only make new enemies.

I also can't think of anyone that would not use Linux, because Ballmer thinks you're a communist. With the recent patent comment, a lot of companies might get scared of adopting Linux and I do think that comment was justfied, but 99% of everything else he says if pure bullshit and only hurts the company.

Please, Ballmer jump around a little more, with a little luck you might get a heart failure.

Reply Score: 1

...
by helf on Fri 31st Mar 2006 16:14 UTC
helf
Member since:
2005-07-06

oh good grief. Grow up people.

user 1 : linux is communism!!!
user 2 : is not!
user 1 : is so!
user 3 : XP isnt "ready for the desktop"
user 6 : In your opinion, you bloody moron.
user 23: *lapses into long winded testimonial about how linux changed his life*

ad infinitum

do you we have to go through this constantly?

Reply Score: 2

RE: ...
by rcsteiner on Fri 31st Mar 2006 21:07 UTC in reply to "..."
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

Hey, it happened back in the 70's when different folks used different microcomputer platforms, and it'll be happening in the year 2500 when Zigblap and Zontarg are using different software in their Thrimscooters.

Welcome to human nature. :-)

Reply Score: 2

Year of xxxx desktop
by Babi Asu on Sat 1st Apr 2006 00:33 UTC
Babi Asu
Member since:
2006-02-11

So everyone has his own desktop year, and so do I.

2006 is my year of OSX desktop.
2004 is my year of FreeBSD server.

Reply Score: 1